Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3428/2026 of SUMIT BOSE Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 8 October 2026
Court No.37 (Bench ID-265691) CHC Rejected In The High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side C.R.M.( A ) 3428 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Bizpur Police
08.10.2026
Item No.104
Court No.37
(Bench ID-265691)
CHC
Rejected
In The High Court at Calcutta
Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
C.R.M.(A) 3428 of 2026
In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Bizpur Police Station Case No. 0152 dated 21.05.2026
under Section 109 of the BNS.
And
In the matter of: Shri Sumit Bose
...… petitioner
Mr. Sandeepan Dutta, Advocate
Mr. Arijit Banik, Advocate
Ms. Manju Biswasharma, Advocate
Mr. Dhrubaneel Biswas, Advocate
.…for the petitioner
Mr. Oiseeroop Sinha, Advocate
Ms. Shyanti Poddar, Advocate
…for the State
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.
2. State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
3. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is falsely implicated. He refers to the date of incident. He submits that, immediately thereafter, the father of the victim registered First Information Report against the husband of the victim. Subsequently, the present police case was started.
4. Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that, the victim consumed poison. He refers to the dying declaration recorded. He submits that, although the father of the victim registered a police case against the husband of the victim, nonetheless, on the basis of the
2 dying declaration, the present police case was started against the petitioner.
5. Apparently, the victim consumed poison. She was alive and was admitted to hospital. The victim recorded her statement in such hospital where she implicates the petitioner. According to the victim, petitioner and the victim entered into illicit relationship. Petitioner used to take advantage of victim physically.
6. There are Call Details Record between the victim and the petitioner.
7. Considering the materials in the case diary, gravity of the offence and involvement of the petitioner therein, I am unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
8. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.
9. CRM(A) 3428 of 2026 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Digitally signed by CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Date: 2026.10.09 18:54:47 +05'30'